MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adolescent Time Use Trends: France 1986 to 1998

2005· article· fr· W2026937045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alain Chenu, Laurent Lesnard

Bibliographic record

VenueLoisir et Société / Society and Leisure · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime allocationLeisure timePsychologyPaid workDemographyReading (process)Work hoursTime-use surveyWork (physics)Developmental psychologyFamily incomeMedicineSociologyPolitical sciencePhysical activityEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines changing patterns of adolescent time use in France from 1986 to 1998. It focuses on adolescents’ aged 15 to 19, living at home with their parents, and attending school. It analyzes how the allocation of adolescent daily time is affected by respondents’ gender, age, and by their parents’ educational background and income. Data are taken from two national time use surveys conducted by INSEE (Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques, Paris) in 1985–1986 (n = 16,046, including 559 adolescents) and in 1998–1999 (n = 15,435, including 1,193 adolescents). One of the main trends in the observed period is the shift in gender roles. In 1986, girls and boys spent the same amount of time in school-related activities, in 1998, this length was higher for girls. The gender gap in domestic work has slightly narrowed. All in all, girls’ total work overload has increased. The allocation of time to work, personal needs and leisure remained similar, regardless of the educational level of parents. The allocation of free time to its various subcomponents is, however, affected by parents’ education: children born in highly educated families spend more time reading, going to the movies, to the theatre or to shows, less time watching TV, walking, or socializing. Parents’ income level is less influential. Adolescents with middle-income parents work harder at school than those from lower or upper income families.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLoisir et Société / Society and LeisureSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207